[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1304550358.2943.10.camel@work-vm>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 16:05:58 -0700
From: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
To: Max Asbock <masbock@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] time: Add locking to xtime access in get_seconds()
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 09:51 -0700, Max Asbock wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 20:11 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> > From: John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
> >
> > So get_seconds() has always been lock free, with the assumption
> > that accessing a long will be atomic.
> >
>
> get_seconds() is used in the x86 machine check handler and there is a
> comment saying:
> /* We hope get_seconds stays lockless */
>
> This needs to be carefully looked at if locking is introduced to
> get_seconds().
Ah. Thanks for pointing this out Max.
I'll go ahead and use Andi's suggestion of the rmb();
Patch soon to follow.
thanks
-john
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists